[Article] The EPIC Control (TEC), Part II

[Bardo]

Linkery. (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/print.php?Article=15380)


Last month, I unveiled the latest deck I’ve been working on, and my submission to mtgTheSource’s “Create a New Good Deck” contest, The EPIC Control (TEC). ... TEC is not Landstill. It does not run nearly the same amount of land. It doesn’t run Counterspell or Crucible of Worlds. It runs Counterbalance, which means your mana curve is decidedly important. If your opponent wants to make sure you don’t get one of the cards in the Fact, they can (with the exception of artifacts + Academy Ruins), because once it hits the yard, it stays there.

[Deep6er]

HUZZAH FOR CREDIT! :)

Important note, Snuff Out costs 4, not 5.

Also, beyond the obligatory "I told you so", are there matchups where Meditate is bad (beyond Ichorid)? I couldn't think of a single one. MAYBE Goyf Sligh. But then again. Counterbalance is stellar against that deck. Seriously, more trusting me, less not trusting me.

Oh yeah, and good article and whatnot.

[FoolofaTook]

How does this do against creatureless control? Solidarity as an example?

[Deep6er]

You're kidding right? Counterbalance beats Solidarity. Take this from the expert. Solidarity's spells are reasonably balanced between the 1-4 slot, that means basically anything will make it difficult to go off. Then, Force of Will may be an issue as well. Seriously. You also have no idea how painful that was to play/say.

[Hoojo]

Important note, Snuff Out costs 4, not 5.


The only thing I could make sense of that statement is activating top twice, once to see the force, second to draw and then counter. Is this right Nightmare?

[Nightmare]

Nah, I just forgot it costs 4. Whoops.

Also, Dave, Meditate is AWFUL against Survival unless you have CounterTop online, a 3CC spell on top, they haven't resolved Harmonic Sliver, and Survival is not in play.

[FoolofaTook]

You're kidding right? Counterbalance beats Solidarity. Take this from the expert. Solidarity's spells are reasonably balanced between the 1-4 slot, that means basically anything will make it difficult to go off. Then, Force of Will may be an issue as well. Seriously. You also have no idea how painful that was to play/say.

How easy is it to get CounterTop in play against Solidarity? I have no idea, which is why I'm asking.

The original question was more to the point of: with as much dedicated creature removal as TEC has how tough a row does it have when those cards are blanks game 1? 4 StP and 3 WoG and 3 Shackles sounds like it would be a burden early on.

[Nightmare]

How easy is it to get CounterTop in play against Solidarity? I have no idea, which is why I'm asking.

The original question was more to the point of: with as much dedicated creature removal as TEC has how tough a row does it have when those cards are blanks game 1? 4 StP and 3 WoG and 3 Shackles sounds like it would be a burden early on.
I don't mean to degrade the issue, but really, Solidarity? Is that even a deck anymore? I honestly haven't seen anyone play it in over a year.

[FoolofaTook]

I don't mean to degrade the issue, but really, Solidarity? Is that even a deck anymore? I honestly haven't seen anyone play it in over a year.

Well, take it as any creatureless deck then. I just mentioned Solidarity because it was a creatureless deck with some counter control that typically tried to go off early enough that CounterTop was not inevitably on the table before it's key turn.

I see 10 dedicated anti-creature spells in TEC that have no other potential use (ignoring the StP your own for life, since I've seen that work once in my life and lead to a win) and I wonder how it would fare against a creatureless opponent.

[Nightmare]

As I said in the article, it does fairly well against TES, which is creatureless. It does extremely well against Landstill, where creature removal has varying degrees of usefulness.

Other than those, and the aforementiond Solidarity, what creatureless decks are we concerned with?

[TeenieBopper]

Maybe it’s a misconception due to testing with particularly capable Goblins players

It's no namedrop, but I'll run it.

[FoolofaTook]

Other than those, and the aforementiond Solidarity, what creatureless decks are we concerned with?


How about any good red burn deck? IggyPop? Any low creature Stax variant?

[Nightmare]

How about any good red burn deck? IggyPop? Any low creature Stax variant?K, sure thing:

Burn strictly better these days if it comes in the form of Goyf Sligh, which is a fine matchup for you, between Shackles, CounterTop, and Blasts from the board. If it's more Burn oriented, then you can get caught off guard, for sure, but if it's a concern, run COP Red in the board over Moat.

IggyPop is a slower, more vulnerable version of TES, which I've discussed at some length. Sometimes you get to steal their Confidants, too.

Stax is now generally playing Magus of the Tabernacle, or Exalted Angel, or both. All your removal spells are fine against these cards game 1. If you feel they aren't pulling their weight, then board them out.

[Bryant Cook]

Good article. Boo on talking about my petdeck.

[frogboy]

The numbers that strike me as odd are 3 Top and 22 land. How did these get arrived at?

[FoolofaTook]

The numbers that strike me as odd are 3 Top and 22 land. How did these get arrived at?

It looks kind of like the standard 21 land that seems to work best in a non-cantripping Control shell + Academy Ruins to me.

[Di]

The numbers that strike me as odd are 3 Top and 22 land. How did these get arrived at?

I have bitched about the land count forever. You're not alone. I've wanted at least 23 and the original draft of the deck had 23, but he hasn't had problems with it as far as I know.

[frogboy]

It looks kind of like the standard 21 land that seems to work best in a non-cantripping Control shell + Academy Ruins to me.

I start all of my control decks with 25 land.

[TeenieBopper]

I start all of my control decks with 25 land.

It seriously drives me completely insane when I see a control deck with less than 23 lands+Brainstorm (since mathematically, brainstorm and ponder count as 1/2 of a land). I can't think of a dedicated control deck in any format that's run less than that.

[Deep6er]

That's certainly a valid point. However, it's important to note that the deck is capable of getting to the mid game. That's important because that's where he will catch up on land drops. I've found that getting the first three will usually allow you to get the next five. Unfortunately, the last five will be spread out, but you'll get there. You don't need too much to start working on slowing them the hell down. Slowing them down will often buy you more than enough time to find the extra lands in a longer game.

Incidentally, the game is also capable of playing out in a manner similar to Threshold. Counter/Top, Tarmogoyf, Force your spell, swing, game. Versatility is the power here.

[thefreakaccident]

The minimum amount of land that I run in control is 23, and that is woth serious cantripping/dig effects... Sensei's divining top is effective at seeking for more lands, but in and of itself a mana hungry card.

Meditate looks odd here, but I have never tested the card in control though; so it may be very good, I could not draw a good opinion on it myself.


Have you ever been hurting for additional threats in the deck though?

I know that you can use prints, and you can use shackles, but they really depend on your opponents cards (they don't have stifles/needles/grips for prints), and shackles really requires you to have lots of blue lands and them to walk into it.

I will not count Jace as a threat however, as he is never really threatening at any point in a game... combo will praise the extra cards, control will do the same, and goblins/threshold thrive on additional cards anyways... he may be able to 'mill' them to death, but you are really asking for a lot from the opponent to let his shananagins go on for that long.


I do like moat however, as it shuts down sooooo many decks in the current meta, I have been using that tech in my SBs since forever and have never wanted anything else to hate on creatures.

[FoolofaTook]

I start all of my control decks with 25 land.

He has 21 mana lands there. No Mishra's no Wastes. You find me a control deck that runs more than 21 colored mana. I guarantee you you can't find me one that runs 25.

[TeenieBopper]

2003 worlds champ

2 Elfhame Palace
2 Flooded Strand
4 Forest
7 Island
4 Krosan Verge
4 Plains
4 Skycloud Expanse
27 lands

2002 world champs

2 Cephalid Coliseum
1 Darkwater Catacombs
10 Island
4 Salt Marsh
3 Swamp
4 Underground River
24 lands (there's also a version with 25)

2004 world champs

7 Forest
6 Plains
4 Secluded Steppe
4 Tranquil Thicket
4 Windswept Heath
25 lands

Sure, go ahead and say those aren't legacy decks, but that's not the point. The point is that control decks are universally mana hungry. I extend the same challenge to you: you find me good, established, dedicated control decks that don't run more than 23 lands (assuming cantrips=.5 lands). Good luck stealing a 4/5 tarmogoyf with only three islands or setting Explosives for three when you're sitting on Tundra, Island, Plains. I'd also like to point out that when I was playing Landstill, I was using Factory and Waste to play spells all the time. They do tap for mana, you know.

[FoolofaTook]

21 colored mana lands is a lot of mana in any theme. Legacy decks, with a few exceptions are going to be 17 colored mana or less.

I looked quickly through the DTB forum and there really are very few decks there that have even 21 colored mana. The 21 in his build is probably the optimal number to have.

[TeenieBopper]

I think you're getting caught up on the whole "colored" mana thing. You still need four total mana to cast wrath of god, and generally at least 4 for Shackles to be effective against any aggro deck that isn't Goblins. Fetches also don't tap for mana, and deplete the chances of drawing another after using one. Granted, the chance is incredibly small, but so is the increased chance of drawing a land by adding one. That small chance, over the course of hundreds or thousands of games, starts to make a difference.

[thefreakaccident]

Of colored mana... this is not the point, the point is the requirements to get to the 3cc-4cc range by turn 3 and 4 consistantly, explosives and shackles are both 'mana' intensive cards, as one requires lots of islands to be effective (a turn 2 goyf will usually not be taken by a turn 3 shackles, being a prime example)... Explosives is a good card, but it gains effectiveness and flexibility with the more mana it has to work with... the CB/Top engine is also very mana-intensive, with a usual requirement of 2-4 a turn (well, for the first couple of turns).

I was just saying it looks a little mana starved already without any help from the opponent, and some of the card choices look a little iffy... that is all I am saying.


EDIT: Teenie Bopper beat me! LOL!

[FoolofaTook]

Well he's got 21 colored mana + Academy Ruins. That gives him 22/60 or 36.67% mana which basically works out to solid 3 land by turn 3 and about 4 by turn 4.

You have to play it close to the edge somewhere in a deck like this and you're better off playing close to the line on mana than solutions.

I could see pulling one of the creature answers for another land, but I could also see leaving it just like it is.

[Bardo]

He has 21 mana lands there. No Mishra's no Wastes. You find me a control deck that runs more than 21 colored mana. I guarantee you you can't find me one that runs 25.

FWIW.

"THE FORBIDDEN PHOENIX", 1998
by Randy Buehler

14 Island
10 Mountain
4 Reflecting Pool
1 Caldera Lake
(29 freaking colored lands)

4 Shard Phoenix
1 Mogg Fanatic

4 Counterspell
4 Forbid
4 Intuition
4 Mana Leak
4 Shock
3 Capsize
2 Dismiss
1 Scroll Rack

Sideboard
3 Mogg Fanatic
3 Portcullis
3 Shattering Pulse
3 Thalakos Drifters
2 Stalking Stones
1 Dismiss

(Just a cool article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/rb63) overall.)

Like Monsenieur Frog, I like to start my control decks at 25 land, and may trim one if the curve is low enough.

Looking at control decks that have a very low land count, check out the Chapin and Turtenwald decks from Flores' MTG.com article last week:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mf182

[frogboy]

Most of the Extended counterbalance control decks are running 24-25 mana sources with Mox, so those are bad examples. I basically just like casting spells and hitting drops.

Also, in control mirrors, usually having more land in play correlates to having a fairly significant advantage.

[Nihil Credo]

Yeah, I'm a fanboy. You should still read this article. (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/12155.html)

[FoolofaTook]

FWIW.

"THE FORBIDDEN PHOENIX", 1998
by Randy Buehler

14 Island
10 Mountain
4 Reflecting Pool
1 Caldera Lake
(29 freaking colored lands)

4 Shard Phoenix
1 Mogg Fanatic

4 Counterspell
4 Forbid
4 Intuition
4 Mana Leak
4 Shock
3 Capsize
2 Dismiss
1 Scroll Rack

Sideboard
3 Mogg Fanatic
3 Portcullis
3 Shattering Pulse
3 Thalakos Drifters
2 Stalking Stones
1 Dismiss

(Just a cool article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/rb63) overall.)

Like Monsenieur Frog, I like to start my control decks at 25 land, and may trim one if the curve is low enough.

Looking at control decks that have a very low land count, check out the Chapin and Turtenwald decks from Flores' MTG.com article last week:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mf182

I can find you white weenies from 1996 that ran 36 creatures. That doesn't make them or the rules that bound them applicable to Legacy in 2007. Just saying.

As to the second point, if you believe 25 lands (or 24 if you trim one) are required for control then why are you running 22 in this thing? Just wondering.

The tight UW control decks of the mid 90's tended to run 22-24 lands before cantrips were widely available. Paul Scott's Millstone, which was probably the best overall strictly UW control deck in the NYC area in that time period ran 21.

When those decks started to splash red the mana curve went up a bit and there were as many as 26 or 27 lands in a deck, however generally speaking 4 of them were Mishra's with the occasional set of Stripmines depending on theme.

A 25 or 26 colored land control deck these days is just going to die miserably to the meta. Decks are too active early on and the threats are too diverse to allow something like Buehler's deck to survive.

[frogboy]

Gifts decks in Kamigawa Block played twenty-three land and eight accelerators for thirty-one mana sources. Does that count?

[Bardo]

I can find you white weenies from 1996 that ran 36 creatures. That doesn't make them or the rules that bound them applicable to Legacy in 2007. Just saying.

Well, I'm picking successful tournament winning decks (Buehler's U/R control), not casual 'kitchen table' decks. Anyway, you asked to see a control deck with a buttload of colored mana--and I supplied it. :)


As to the second point, if you believe 25 lands (or 24 if you trim one) are required for control then why are you running 22 in this thing? Just wondering.

I don't know what you're talking about. The list in the article in the first post? Not mine, that's Adam's. The MMUC build I listed on page 1 has 24 land--25 a week ago (#25 being a Conclave, which has since been dropped).


A 25 or 26 colored land control deck these days is just going to die miserably to the meta. Decks are too active early on and the threats are too diverse to allow something like Buehler's deck to survive.

I agree here. 16-20 colored lands (including fetches) is usually correct, and you can add in additional colorless sources without hurting your ability to play your spells when you need them. Really though, it depends on the build, the numbers of colors it's running, and the minimum operating requirements of the deck (WBGGUU - for the 4color version of Landstill w/ Garruk, for instance).

[FoolofaTook]

Well, I'm picking successful tournament winning decks (Buehler's U/R control), not casual 'kitchen table' decks. Anyway, you asked to see a control deck with a buttload of colored mana--and I supplied it. :)

The 36 creature white weenie I'm thinking about finished second in a 256 person tournament in 1995. That was an elimination format, not swiss. Your point is well-taken though, decks that used to be strong are at best kitchen table casual at this point.




I don't know what you're talking about. The list in the article in the first post? Not mine, that's Adam's. The MMUC build I listed on page 1 has 24 land--25 a week ago (#25 being a Conclave, which has since been dropped).

My apologies, I often get people and tags confused and I thought Adam Barnello and Bardo were one and the same.




I agree here. 16-20 colored lands (including fetches) is usually correct, and you can add in additional colorless sources without hurting your ability to play your spells when you need them. Really though, it depends on the build, the numbers of colors it's running, and the minimum operating requirements of the deck (WBGGUU - for the 4color version of Landstill w/ Garruk, for instance).

Yeah, I think 21 land, most of it colored, is the right number for a 2-color control deck. You can make an argument for 22 or even 23 lands, with Mishra's or Wastes included, in that type of low curve deck. If you go more colors you need more land, although I still think 25 is really high in terms of straight colored mana.

[Finn]

I think the land is good. I don't think it's particularly relevant to compare control in Legacy to the sort of stuff you are listing.


2004 world champs

7 Forest
6 Plains
4 Secluded Steppe
4 Tranquil Thicket
4 Windswept Heath
25 lands
Isn't this the year with hardcast Akromas? Not a useful comparison since WotC was experimenting with longer matches.


2002 world champs

2 Cephalid Coliseum
1 Darkwater Catacombs
10 Island
4 Salt Marsh
3 Swamp
4 Underground River
24 lands (there's also a version with 25)I don't think I would count Coliseum as a land.

@ Bardo: Capsize? You are comparing Barnello's deck to one with Capsize? That shit wants about a thousand mana.
Forbid...
Stalking Stones...
Shard Phoenix...
Even Counterspell is usually too mana-intensive for our format.

Where these guys were using these, we have:

Force of Will
Counterbalance
Jace
Tarmogoyf

Another reason we need fewer is the ability to get your color more consistently. There is no need to bludgeon the deck into giving you the right color with fetches and twisties.

I am unconvinced of the lack of blue cards as pitch bait for FoW though. I can see it being a problem from time to time.

[Bardo]

@ Bardo: Capsize? You are comparing Barnello's deck to one with Capsize? That shit wants about a thousand mana.

Oh god no. I was just providing FoolofaTook a list that was awash in colored mana (see the previous page).

Re: your list -- Forbid is border-borderline playable and CSpell can work in the right shell/strategy. The rest, yeah, unplayable.